Russia says Norway is now 'on the list of targets for our strategic weapons' - but it's an empty threat

With geopolitical tension mounting in the Baltic region Gotland has been remilitarised, NATO has posted four battlions in the Baltic states and most recently 330 US marines have been posted in in Værnes, Norway - 1,000 km from the border with Russia.

The situation is analogous with the game of Chicken in game-theory: both players (NATO and Russia) want the other to yield and let them increase their geopolitical influence, but it is better for any party to yield, than to incur the catastrophic result of both parties playing agressively yeilding (war).

Ad

RUSSIA

Yielding policy

Agressive policy

NATO

Yielding policy

PEACE (status quo)

Russia gains geopolitical influence

Agressive policy

Nato gains geopolitical influence

WAR (bad for both players)

The game can be solved by pre-commiting to an agressive strategy, or an agressive response to an agressive action. 500 US troops posted in the Baltics and 330 in Norway wouldn't do much to defend against a theoretical Russian invasion. But they can be still be effective in deterring a hostile action, because if hundreds of American soldiers were wiped out in Europe, public opinion would leave the US no choice but to go to war. Given only the choice between a yielding policy and war, the rational choice is to yield and have peace.

In the case of Ukraine there was no such pre-commitment from NATO's side. After the the fact of the annexation of crimea Western powers had only a choice between letting Russia get away with it's aggression or having war.

War is too steep a cost for any party for it to be a credible response to violations. That can be exploited, as we're seeing with the recent deterioration of foreign relations in the Baltic region. Russia now challenges the West in virtually every arena possible, with cyberattacks, nuclear posturing, military invasions of Western-leaning countries, and the intimidation of US allies and neutral states. Any provocative behavior will go unpunished as long as its consequences are not considered more costly than war.

Unfortunately, such behavior can transform a game of chicken into a war of attrition, with an incremental escalation of conflict.

Yesterday, in response to the posting of US Marines in Norway, Russian defence politician and diplomat Frants Klintsevitj told Norwegian TV2 that, "We have never before had Norway on the list of targets for our strategic weapons. [...] But if this develops, Norway’s population will suffer," the Independent reports, and "This is very dangerous for Norway and Norwegians."

This can be seen as an extension of the chicken-game. Basically, that is saying, 'Remember there are cost associated with the pre-commitment strategy, should there actually be a conflict.' - thus implying a cost for Norway in its cooperative relationship with the US. It is not actually a threat as much as another step in undermining the West's cooperation, and pushing Russia's foreign policy forward.

In keeping with this, Norway's defence minister, Ine Eriksen Søreide, said there was no reason to worry about the Klintsevitj's statements.

"The Russians are reacting at the moment in the same way toward almost everything the Nato countries are doing," she said, according to the Independent.